No subject

deletion process bites newcomers.

Come on,  I've been a Wikipedian since February last year and I still
don't know the speedy deletion criteria. Do you expect a newcomer to
know them?

Chen Liping is among Singapore's top actresses. In terms of fame,
success, etc. she is probably only matched by Zoe Tay and Fann Wong.
The last time I read her article, it mentioned that she had won
several awards, and I added a sentence about her starring in the movie
The Best Bet. Was this an insufficient assertion of notability, that
the article was speedied?

2007/4/13, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>:
> Maury Markowitz wrote:
>
> >>Despite the objections raised from time to time about this, I fail to
> >>see the issue. I think it boils down to the generic mistrust of all
> >>administrators that certain people who are not administrators seem to
> >>harbour.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I've been a contributer to the wiki for five years and an admin for three or
> >four. I object to this sort of behavor, and it has nothing to do with
> >"generic mistrust of all administrators".
> >
> It has everything to do with generic mistrust of administrators because
> it is what creates it.  These people who go ahead and delete things
> following no counsel but there own, and without any effort to correct
> the situation produce an atmosphere where no-one feels certain what an
> admin will delete next.  If we were confident that they were restraining
> themselves to deleting pure vandalism nobody would become concerned.
> Instead their laziness and impatience to have a high quota of deleted
> garbage prevents them from doing minimal searches or trying to start a
> dialogue with the contributor woh was likely acting in good faith.  I
> can't stress enough that it's likely the leading cause of generic
> mistrust of administrators.
>
> >Ok, here's my suggestions:
> >
> >In cases where tagging may result in an article, or significant portions of
> >it, being removed for reasons other than vandalism or similar, the tagger
> >must:
> >
> >1) place a note on the editor's talk page saying the article has been tagged
> >2) place a note (NOT templated) on the article talk page explaining what the
> >problem is. "failed notability" is not good enough
> >
> >Any tags placed that fail to meet these can be summarily deleted. If they
> >are not removed, at the admin's leisure, they are _not_actionable_ until
> >someone DOES meet these criterion or does remove them. Additionally,
> >incorrect tags, prods on NPOV or notability for instance, should be
> >summarily removed. These would fix the vast majority of cases I come across.
> >
> That sounds good, though it is probably less important when only
> significant portions of an article are deleted.  At least then the
> deleted material is easily available through the article's history.
>
> These lazy admins should be treated in the same way they treat
> contributors.  Persistent refusal to treat users with respect should be
> grounds to initiate a request to de-admin.
>
> Ec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>